A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

At around 14:00 on August 12, 2016, the Defendant appeared as a witness of the case of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud), etc. for C and D (one person) in the Seocho-gu Seoul Central District Court, Seocho-gu, Seoul, Seocho-gu, Seoul, as a witness at the court room of 508, and took an oath, and then sent correspondence to the witness of C (Defendant) and delivered correspondence to D.

This is because we change the address.

“The testimony was made.”

However, C intended, however, to see that the letter to be sent to D is put into a letter bag with the address of D, put it into another letter bag with the address of the defendant's address and dispatch it to the defendant, and then let the defendant send the letter to D under his name by allowing the defendant to send the letter to D, and the defendant was also well aware of such circumstances.

Nevertheless, the defendant made a false statement contrary to memory as above and raised perjury.

Summary of Evidence

1. The witness C and each legal statement in D;

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused by the prosecution;

1. The protocol of public trial as of August 12, 2016 in Seoul Central District Court Decision 2016 High Court Decision 403 Gohap403, the record of the examination of witnesses, and the record of the examination of defendants;

1. On June 14, 2016, the defendant and his/her defense counsel asserted to the effect that the defendant did not make a false statement against his/her memory and stated in the rest of mistake that confused with his/her memory.

However, the circumstances acknowledged by the above evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, i.e., the letter to be sent to D, i.e., in a letter bag containing D’s address, and delivered it to D through the Defendant, and the Defendant was also aware of this fact as a matter of course.

It can be seen, and ② at the time of sending correspondence to D, C was notified of the situation that C knows the address of D, but C would deliver correspondence through the Defendant.